By Chanelle Grosbard, 2026 Emerging Leaders Committee Member
“Education is perhaps the most important function of state and local governments… It is the very foundation of good citizenship.” – Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Although decades of advocacy and policy reform have yet to fully realize the promise of this landmark decision, educational equity currently faces a new test: the rapid integration of digital technology into classrooms, including those inside juvenile detention facilities. As laptops, tablets, and secured learning platforms become increasingly common, we must confront a difficult question: are we expanding educational opportunity, or simply digitizing inequality?
Across the country, juvenile justice systems are investing heavily in educational technology, and what began as a set of pilot programs has quickly become standard practice. In North Carolina, for example, tablets now support high school coursework, career and technical education, and college readiness. In parts of California, digital devices extend learning beyond the limited hours of in‑person instruction that facilities can offer. Research published as recently as April 2026 confirms this broader shift, noting that digital devices are now routinely used not only for education, but also for communication and reentry preparation.
On paper, this shift looks promising. Many justice‑involved youth enter detention with substantial educational gaps. Federal data consistently shows that they perform several grade levels below their peers, experience higher rates of learning disabilities, and often have long histories of disrupted schooling. For these young people, traditional classrooms alone rarely meet their needs.
Technology, then, seems to offer a compelling solution. Digital platforms can individualize instruction, allow students to work at their own pace, revisit foundational skills, and access courses that facilities might otherwise be unable to provide. For youth who have already been denied consistent access to the education they deserve, this flexibility can be transformative.
But the reality is more complicated and more urgent. Even outside detention facilities, the COVID-19 pandemic revealed that digital learning is not a simple fix. Students across the country struggled to stay engaged, navigate unfamiliar platforms, and receive timely support from teachers. Families with fewer resources faced additional barriers, from unreliable internet to limited devices. If digital learning proved difficult in supportive home environments, its limitations inside secure facilities are even more pronounced.
Inside juvenile detention facilities, technology comes with strict limitations. Unlike other students, youth often cannot freely explore the internet, communicate with same-age peers, or access the broad range of resources that shape digital literacy in the outside world. As a result, many young people use digital devices daily without developing the skills required for healthy digital citizenship—skills that are now essential for education, employment, and civic participation.
At the same time, facilities are increasingly relying on digital tools to extend learning beyond limited in-person instruction hours. This creates a potential worst-case scenario where technology begins to fill gaps created by persistent teacher shortages. If this happens, digital platforms risk functioning more as mechanisms of supervision rather than sources of meaningful support. In these circumstances, youth may be doubly disadvantaged, leaving facilities not only with ongoing academic gaps, but also without the digital competencies needed to navigate the world they are returning to.
Still, dismissing technology altogether would overlook its real potential. When implemented thoughtfully, digital tools can help address the wide range of needs among detained youth, from varying grade levels to social-emotional challenges. They can also support continuity of education, especially during transitions between facilities or back into the community.
The issue, then, is not whether technology should be used, but how. Providing devices alone does not ensure meaningful education; systems must also invest in qualified educators, strong curricula, and thoughtful integration of digital tools, along with privacy protections and oversight to ensure these platforms serve educational rather than supervisory purposes.
The expansion of technology in juvenile detention reflects both progress and risk: it offers a chance to close long‑standing educational gaps, but only if implemented with care. If the goal is truly equal education, technology must do more than deliver content. It must create genuine opportunities for learning, growth, and preparation for life beyond detention, rather than replicating existing inequalities in a new format.
Sources:
https://www.ncdps.gov/blog/2024/02/23/tablets-broaden-horizons-juvenile-justice-facilities
https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.01370
https://youth.gov/youth-topics/juvenile-justice/youth-involved-juvenile-justice-system